1. General information
Location and description of the intervention
City or FUA
Stuttgart
Region
Europe
Native title of the NBS intervention
Regeneration von Feuchtgebieten Wolfschlugen
Short description of the intervention
The Restoration of degraded wetlands in Wolfschlugen (in the administrative district of Stuttgart) was conducted within the wider regional level of sustainable urban development to enhance resilience, protect the city from flooding, support sustainable development, and safeguard biodiversity. Ditches and craters line the 700 metres long and 50 - 70 metres wide strip of landscape northeast of the development boundary behind the Wolfschlugen forest cemetery. This is formed by the Riederwiesen, which absorb water to protect the place from flooding. The wetland should protect people at least during a so-called hundred-year flood and at the same time offer animals and plants a habitat. (ref 3, 11)
Address

City-scale project
Wolfschlugen
Germany

Area boundary
POINT (9.29887 48.653062)
NBS area image
Source of NBS area image
Google maps. Available at: https://www.google.com/maps/search/Wolfschlugen+cemetery/@48.6528692,9.2976872,592m/data=!3m1!1e3. Accessed on 21st October, 2020.
With the information currently available, its not possible to provide several coordinates.
Type of area before implementation of the NBS
Timeline of intervention
Start date of the intervention (planning process)
pre-1990
Start date of intervention (implementation process)
2008
End date of the intervention
2017
Present stage of the intervention
Goals of the intervention
1. Decrease the level of drought;
2. Decrease the duration and volume of water deficit;
3. Increase a natural habitat diversity;
4. Improve water quality;
5. Creation of a natural buffer against flooding;
6. Creation of new recreational area for Stuttgart citizens (ref 1, 11).
Quantitative targets
Unknown
Monitoring indicators defined
1. pH level fluctuation
2. Number of new natural habitats (ref 1, 4).
Climate change adaptation: What were the goals of the NBS?
Climate change adaptation: What activities are implemented to realize the conservation goals and targets?
Implementation activities
The following implementation activities were realized,
1. Valorization of wetlands
2. Modeling of wetlands
3. Trenches and craters along approximately 700 meters long and 50 to 70 meters wide landscape strip were introduced in Wolfschlugen to mitigate the rise of water during possible flooding. The biotope thus serves as a protection against flooding
4. New plants planted in the area to create a place for the retreat of local citizens
5. In order to observe the animals and the plants better, a small wooden bridge through the densely covered terrain was established (ref 1, 11).
NBS domain and interventions
Ecological domain(s) where the NBS intervention(s) is/are implemented
Blue infrastructure
Rivers/streams/canals/estuaries
In-land wetlands, peatlands, swamps, and moors
Green areas for water management
Rain gardens
Swales and filter strips
Sustainable urban drainage systems
What is the level of innovation / development of the NBS related to water management?
Vegetation Type
Please specify how many trees were planted
Unknown
Services
Expected ecosystem services delivered
Provisioning services
Water (surface and ground water for drinking and non-drinking purposes)
Regulating services
Local climate regulation (temperature reduction)
Coastal protection
Flood regulation
Water purification / filtration
Habitat and supporting services
Habitats for species
Maintenance of genetic diversity
Cultural services
Aesthetic appreciation
Recreation
Intellectual interactions (scientific and / or educational)
Scale
Spatial scale
Meso-scale: Regional, metropolitan and urban level
Beneficiaries
Primary Beneficiaries
Governance
Governance arrangements
Please specify the roles of the specific government and non-government actor groups involved in the initiative
The city council (ref 11)
Key actors - initiating organization
Please specify other Key actors - Other stakeholders involved
There are some researchers who promoted the wetland regeneration in Stuttgart. For example, Prof. Antje Stokman from Stuttgart University (5). As well as such research institutions as ILPO (Institute of Landscape and Ecology) at Stuttgart University (6).
Key actors - Other stakeholders involved (besides initiating actors)
Regional government
Local government/municipality
Researchers/university
Participatory methods/forms of community involvement used
Policy drivers
NBS intervention implemented in response to an Regional Directive/Strategy
Unknown
Please specify the "Regional Directive/Strategy"
LIFE (“The Financial Instrument for the Environment”) is a program launched by the European Commission and coordinated
by the Environment Directorate-General (LIFE Unit - E.4) (4). The program produced a document "LIFE and Europe’s wetlands
Restoring a vital ecosystem" which contains planning recommendations (4) but no direct reference was made to this in the project documents.
NBS intervention implemented in response to a national regulations/strategy/plan
Yes
Please specify the national regulations/strategy/plan
1. In the 1970s Germany signed off on an International Wetlands Convention, agreeing, among other things, to protect its marshlands.
2. The Ramsar Convention is an international agreement for the protection of wetlands of international importance, especially as a habitat for water and water birds. Germany joined the Ramsar Agreement in 1976 and has so far designated 35 Ramsar areas. In Baden-Württemberg region (to which Stuttgart belongs to), the three Ramsar areas of Wollmatingerried (767 hectares) and Mindelsee (459 hectares) and the cross-border Ramsar region of Oberrhein / Rhin are designated as areas of international natural importance (ref 7, 10).
NBS intervention implemented in response to a local regulation/strategy/plan
Unknown
Mandatory or voluntary intervention
Mandatory (based on policy)
Intervention is mandatory
Enablers
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS vision/strategy/plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS section/part in a more general plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Presence of city network or regional partnerships focused on NBS - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
1. The Natura 2000 network of protected sites and the integration of wetlands into future river basin management
planning (under the WFD) are helping to guarantee their future conservation and sustainable use (ref 4).
Presence of GI / NBS research project - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
1. Martin Prominski et al., River.Space.Design, Planning Strategies, Methods and Projects for Urban Rivers. Second and Enlarged Edition, 2nd and exp.. ed. (Berlin, Basel: Birkhäuser, 2017) mentions this project as an example.
2. Research project within LIFE (“The Financial Instrument for the Environment”) program potentially served as an enabler (ref 4).
Subsidies/investment for GI / NBS in the city - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Please specify
The project was sponsored by the Verband Region Stuttgart with 70,000 euros (11)
Co-finance for NBS
No
Co-financing governance arrangements
No
Was this co-governance arrangement already in place, or was it set up specifically for this NBS?
Financing
What is/was the Cost/Budget (EUR) of the NBS or green infrastructure elements?
Unknown
What are the total amount of expected annual maintenance costs?
Unknown
What is the expected annual maintenance costs of the NBS or GI elements?
Unknown
Please specify cost savings
Unknown
Please specify total cost (EUR)
Total costs comprised of 200,000 euros (ref 11)
Source(s) of funding
Type of fund(s) used
Non-financial contribution
Unknown
Business models
Which of the involved actors was motivated by this model?
Type of innovation
Please specify technological innovation
In Germany, first, attempts to use this ecological technology of wetlands regeneration were recognized in the early 1990s. Since then, further, development continued until a high level of treatment performance was reached (2). For example, in the case of re-wetting of the western Lake Dümmer fen area – Lower Saxony (4).
Novelty level of the innovation
Please specify novelty level of the innovation
Unknown
Replicability/Transferability
Please specify Replicability/Transferability
Unknown
Impacts, benefits
Description of environmental benefits
Some impacts might need a long time to measure accurately.
1. Rare animals, such as the butterfly species, blue-button butterflies, could return to the area. The Wiesenknopf - a rose plant - is already available in large numbers. And in the neighbouring biotope, there are common frogs and grass snakes.
2. The place is now working as a flood defence system and helping in improving the water quality as well. In the event of heavy rain, two sluices can be closed by the local building yard or by the fire brigade to flood the meadows and keep the water away from the site. The wetland is expected to protect people at least during a so-called hundred-year flood and at the same time offer animals and plants a haven. 3. the surrounding area also has been restored and protected. (ref 4, 11)
Description of economic benefits
The project is expected to help with financial cost reductions related with flood damages. (ref 11)
Description of social and cultural benefits
1. In the event of heavy rain, two sluices can be closed by the local building yard or by the fire brigade to flood the meadows and keep the water away from the site. -this provides protection from floods. The wetland is expected to protect people at least during a so-called hundred-year flood.
2. On three boards, passers-by are given information about the ecology of the project with texts and pictures, on the southwestern edge of which is a wet biotope.
3. In order to be able to observe the animals and plants better, a small wooden walkway leads through the densely overgrown area. In addition, two slightly elevated dirt roads run from the forest through the wetland to the neighbouring fields.
4. A ditch leads in the middle through the meadows at the edge of the forest, from which small side ditches lead into the meadows and feed them with water. (ref 11)
Type of reported impacts
Indicators
1. Natural biotopes regenerated in order to provide flood protection
2. The amount of greenery in the area increased
3. New recreational space created
4. Infrastructure for visitors to a biotope provided (ref 11)
Analysis of specific impact categories
Job creation: The NBS created ...
Environmental justice: The implementation of the NBS project resulted in ...
Negative impacts: Did the project cause any problems or concerns?
No information was found regarding negative impacts of the project
COVID-19 pandemic
Unknown as of September, 2020.
Methods of impact monitoring
Evidence for use of assessment
Presence of an assessment, evaluation and/or monitoring process
Unknown
Presence of indicators used in reporting
No evidence in public records
Presence of monitoring/evaluation reports
No evidence in public records
Availability of a web-based monitoring tool
No evidence in public records
Impact assessment mechanism
Name of any specific impact assessment tools
Monitoring of wetlands includes observation and sampling of wetlands for the purpose of collecting and interpreting data which is then used to report and control the wetland or processes affecting a wetland. Monitoring is conducted in order to identify wetland recourses and to map the change of these resources over time. It allows determining the effectiveness of rehabilitation or restoration efforts as well as to determine the response of a wetland to identified direct and indirect impacts. The project of the restoration of degraded wetlands in Wolfschlugen was just completed, so this method will soon be applied to analyse the results. (ref 1)
Use of GIS in mapping impacts
Yes
Citizen involvement
Citizens involvement in assessment/evaluation
Unknown
Citizens involvement in the analysis of the assessment/evaluation
Unknown
Follow-up to the evaluation / assessment
Unknown
References
Documents relevant to the intervention
Attachment Size
Antje Stokman (3.78 MB) 3.78 MB
List of references
1. Tomasz Okruszko et al. (2007). Wetlands: Monitoring, Modelling and Management. CRC Press, Available at: https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=-bW_Goj6nzsC&pg=PA279&lpg=PA279&dq=wetland+stuttgart&source=bl&ots=KzXaDjR-Xw&sig=lGmlcQFeGpref-GuS3VaTV4gzsE&hl=ru&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiwvv2j7YPVAhXiHpoKHaKcAng4ChDoAQg8MAk#v=onepage&q=wetland%20stuttgart&f=false. Accessed on 23rd September, 2020.
2. Daniel Meyer, Pascal Molle, Dirk Esser, Stéphane Troesch, Fabio Masi and Ulrich Dittmer. (2013). Constructed Wetlands for Combined Sewer Overflow Treatment—Comparison of German, French and Italian Approaches.
3. ICLEI. (2017). Nature-based solutions for sustainable urban development. ICLEI Briefing Sheet - Nature-based Solutions.
4. (2007). LIFE and Europe’s wetlands: Restoring a vital ecosystem, Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/life/publications/lifepublications/lifefocus/documents/wetlands.pdf. Accessed on 23rd September, 2020.
5. Antje Stokman. (2013). PLANNING, DESIGN, AND IMPLEMENTATION OF URBAN WETLANDS.
6. (2017). Institute for Landscape Planning and Ecology (ILPO), Available at: http://www.ilpoe.uni-stuttgart.de/. Accessed on 23rd Septemebr, 2020.
7. The Local. (2013). German wetlands 'nearly all gone', Available at: https://www.thelocal.de/20130202/47717. Accessed on 23rd September, 2020.
8. Martin Prominski et al. (2017). River.Space.Design, Planning Strategies, Methods, and Projects for Urban Rivers. Second and Enlarged Edition. Berlin, Basel: Birkhäuser, Available at: https://www.degruyter.com/view/supplement/9783035610420_Look_inside.pdf. Accessed on 23rd September, 2020.
9. Susan Hagood. (2002). Germany: Where Roads and Wildlife Coexist, https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ecosystems/greenerroadsides/gr_summer02p3.asp [Not Available in September, 2020]
10. Ramsar-Feuchtgebiete von internationaler Bedeutung, Available at: https://um.baden-wuerttemberg.de/de/umwelt-natur/naturschutz/schutzgebiete-vom-nationalpark-bis-zur-biosphaere/ramsar-schutzgebiete/. Accessed on 23rd September, 2020.
11. Braitinger, P. (2017). Feuchtgebiet sorgt für mehr Hochwasserschutz, Available at: http://www.stuttgarter-nachrichten.de/inhalt.wolfschlugen-feuchtgebiet-sorgt-fuer-mehr-hochwasserschutz.7f062c6f-362f-4a4e-b9a7-81660e92fa1d.html. Accessed on 23rd September, 2020.
Additional comments
One of the very first nature conservation issues ever put forward for European and international policy consideration under the 1971 Ramsar Convention on the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. Following on from this, as a contracting party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the European Community has taken decisive steps to fulfil its commitments and to meet the
target defined by the heads of state and government to halt biodiversity loss by 2010. In May 2006, the European
Commission adopted a communication on biodiversity and an action plan which defines priority actions to meet
this target. Many of the objectives, targets and actions are directly relevant to the conservation and wise use of
wetlands. The action plan also emphasises the links to other relevant environmental legislation, including the
Water Framework Directive (WFD (4).
Comments and notes
Public Images
Image
Wetland
The Local
https://www.thelocal.de/20130202/47717